Search results

1 – 3 of 3
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article

Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis

Safety management systems are created by firms to insure workplace safety while managing acceptable levels of risk. Global competition and the need to assimilate new…

Abstract

Purpose

Safety management systems are created by firms to insure workplace safety while managing acceptable levels of risk. Global competition and the need to assimilate new processes, materials, and technologies, have imparted a more immediate financial and societal imperative in identifying the firm's safety stakeholders. This research identifies a strategic framework to be used by organizations in managing their safety management systems and stakeholders.

Design/methodology/approach

Management's ability to organize stakeholders' demands is central to prioritizing safety knowledge and channeling that knowledge effectively through the organization. Management's safety strategy dilemma can be condensed through the optic of a knowledge‐based decision cycle. The three‐stage decision cycle developed in this research asserts that setting safety strategy is simultaneously a knowledge management challenge for the firm and a process of identifying stakeholder salience.

Findings

The safety management system model presented classifies the organization's stakeholders critical to each stage of the strategy setting process. Clarifying stakeholders' power, legitimacy, and urgency is essential in prioritizing and developing those stakeholders' safety knowledge. This decision model should improve the prospect of managers implementing successful safety management system strategies.

Originality/value

The societal and financial costs of workplace safety management system failures diminish organization's effectiveness. This model provides a new approach to implementing knowledge based safety strategies from the organization's stakeholders.

Details

Business Strategy Series, vol. 10 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-5637

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article

Alfred Lewis and Jon Loebbaka

The purpose of this paper is to depict the increasing level of environmental turbulence in the aerospace aluminium industry utilizing a case study to highlight success…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to depict the increasing level of environmental turbulence in the aerospace aluminium industry utilizing a case study to highlight success strategies. The paper examines the impact of the environmental turbulence of September 11, 2001 on the commercial aerospace industry and how a firm successfully re‐adapted its corporate strategies in response to the discontinuity.

Design/methodology/approach

The objectives of this paper were addressed through an examination of firms' strategy formulation and deployment methods. Furthermore, the incidence of strategic decay coupled with resilience of firms in the aerospace industry is discussed with reference to the September 11, 2001 event in the United States.

Findings

Aerospace aluminium suppliers have mainly concentrated their efforts in the development of high strength patented alloys in order to defend market share. The aircraft manufactures namely Airbus and Boeing are in the process of shifting to composite materials in order to achieve significant weight reductions coupled with greater fuel efficiency.

Originality/value

The work highlights how a company can use strategic resilience to adapt to the dynamic environment of an oligopic market dominated by Airbus and Boeing.

Details

Business Strategy Series, vol. 9 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1751-5637

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article

Stan Abraham

This report on the Fifth Annual Conference of the Association of Strategic Planning (ASP), “Strategy in action: lessons from practice,” was held in Long Beach, California…

Abstract

This report on the Fifth Annual Conference of the Association of Strategic Planning (ASP), “Strategy in action: lessons from practice,” was held in Long Beach, California. This report covers the two keynote speakers plus highlights from a selection of the presentations (for more information see the ASP website: www.strategyplus.org). PurposeThe article summarizes the highlights of the Association for Strategic Planning's 2006 Annual Conference held on February 28, 2006 in Long Beach, California, one of the premier strategic‐planning conferences in the US. Design/methodology/approachThis is reportage on the annual ASP conference. FindingsThe remarks of the two keynote speakers are summarized: W. Chan Kim's on “blue ocean strategy” that makes the competition irrelevant, and Milind Lele's remarks on situational monopolies that also, for a time, gets rid of competition. Both authors' remarks were based on recently published best selling books. In addition, of 40 other presentations offered in concurrent sessions, the article highlights a select few, enough to give a flavor of the conference theme of “Strategy in action – lessons from practice”. Practical implicationsThe actual conference (and this report) was targeted both to practitioners and strategic consultants eager to learn about the latest methods and pitfalls in doing strategic planning. Originality/valueBoth audiences will benefit from reading this article principally by learning about the experiences, experiments, and successes of other companies' and consultants' efforts in actually doing strategic planning.

Details

Strategy & Leadership, vol. 34 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1087-8572

Keywords

1 – 3 of 3